Quebec should be able to move forward with a provincial long-gun registry with few legal hurdles, experts suggest, even if it no longer has access to federal long-gun registry data dating back to 1995.

Within hours of a Supreme Court of Canada decision giving the federal Conservatives the right to destroy nearly a decade’s worth of federal long-gun registry data from the province, Public Safety Minister Lise Thériault had announced her government’s firm intention to “roll up our sleeves and move forward” — with or without Ottawa’s help.

That will mean drafting, tabling and passing new legislation for a provincial registry by the end of this parliamentary session, Thériault said. The proposed legislative base will, in turn, set up a timeline for the establishment of a new database.

Based on “conservative” estimates, a provincial registry will cost at least $30 million, but Thériault acknowledged the number could fluctuate. The federal long-gun registry, created in the aftermath of the 1989 École Polytechnique massacre, set Canadian taxpayers back $1 billion.

Guns are pieces of property that people own in the province of Quebec. If Quebec wants to regulate that, it can do so. — Université de Montréal law professor Paul Daly

According to Université de Montréal law professor Paul Daly, there’s nothing stopping Quebec from starting a new registry from scratch without the federal long-gun data.

“The provinces have a very, very broad power in terms of property and civil rights, so setting up a firearms registry is not very different from setting up an automobile registry or a land-titles registry,” Daly said. “Guns are pieces of property that people own in the province of Quebec. If Quebec wants to regulate that, it can do so.”

There could still be court challenges to the provincial registry — whether by the federal government or by gun-owners themselves — but they would be unlikely to succeed, Daly added. Normally, in order for Ottawa to object, there would have to be a conflict between provincial and federal law. In this case, Daly explained, “the federal government has exited the room, so I think Quebec can pretty much do as it wishes.”

“There have been lots of creative challenges to firearms legislation over the years,” he added. “But I think Quebec’s chances of winning are pretty good.”

Wendy Cukier, president of the Coalition for Gun Control, acknowledged earlier this week creating a provincial registry without help from the federal government would require significant effort, but said it was entirely doable.

Following a unanimous motion passed last fall in the National Assembly, the provincial bill setting up the new registry is expected to be supported by all opposition parties. The Parti Québécois, Québec solidaire and the Coalition Avenir Québec all reaffirmed that they would back the government’s plan on Friday.

Thériault said the provincial Liberals “remain convinced that the daily use of a tool like this one is necessary to facilitate police investigations and interventions,” adding the most recent statistics suggest the federal long-gun registry data — which was still available to Quebec’s police forces until Friday — was consulted an average of 900 times a day.

The minister was careful to note a provincial registry is not designed to limit hunting activities in Quebec or to crack down on lawful gun owners.

You argue before the courts to win, you don’t argue to lose. We fought. We lost. Fine. We roll up our sleeves and we move forward. — Public Safety Minister Lise Thériault

Quebec fought for the right to keep the federal long-gun registry data linked to 1.6 million rifles and shotguns in the province for three full years, but on Friday morning, the Supreme Court of Canada sided with Ottawa in a 5-4 decision and brought an end to the legal wrangling. The three Quebec judges on the court were among the dissenters.

The federal records are expected to be destroyed almost immediately, as mandated by federal law. According to Thériault, the province had genuinely hoped to win the case before the country’s highest court.

“You argue before the courts to win, you don’t argue to lose,” she said. “We fought. We lost. Fine. We roll up our sleeves and we move forward.”

This Week's Flyers

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.